As noted in a previous thread, I had problems with a Firewire 4-pin connector in a camcorder and after giving it a close examination realized that the configuration for the port is ill conceived. The cable end has 4 flat contacts embedded in plastic material, while the port in the camcorder has 4 flimsy little tines that mate up with contacts on the cable end. Highly subject to damage if they get grabbed the wrong way.
Is this a Sony design or are all 4-pin Firewire ports made that way? It's just really dumb that they deviated from the example of the 6-pin connector which is much more robust with embedded connectors on both the cable and port ends.
While Apple originated the Firewire protocol (a.k.a. IEE 1394), I don't believe that they ever used the connector design that they ever used the connector design that the OP described. All the Apple equipment that I have seen uses six conductor design.
I will address the question in the title, rather than specifically the IEEE 1394, except to say that the MATERIAL for the connectors might not even be a part of the standard. There is much more to the standard, such as signal protocols, and such, and likely more deliberation was given to these aspects than the mechanical design of the connectors. I have sat on a standards committee (though for an avionics standard, not a photography standard- though I have had acquaintences on imaging ones).
Any such standard is put together by some society or professional group (in this case the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. The group decides there is a need for such a standard and seeks to create a committee (or subcommittees at times for major standards, splitting up the effort). This work is unpaid volunteer effort, with the employer of the committee members picking up the tab for the people's salary and the travel expenses. The for-profit businesses are willing to spring for this in particular if they are or have developed a standard that they want to become the standard- this is good practice. Others, however do it just to faciliate progress in the technology. In addition to for-profit companies, research organizations and educational ones also frequently contribute members. Sometimes the committee comes up with a completey new standard, sometimes it adopts some existing protocol if it is available and the committee thinks it is the best route. There is a LOT of politics involved in such committees and the results are (or at least SHOULD BE, decided by consensus.
As a side note, I am a little bit familiar with the JPEG effort, and fail to see how someone can patent JPEG itself. I am assuming that the patent is for a SPECIFIC algorithm for the compression or decompression, and NOT for the standard itself. I have seen articles claiming the latter, which I do not understand :-(
It's not the number of contacts I have a beef with but the way they're constructed. It would be simple enough to make the port contacts the same way they make them on the 6-pin.
The IEEE 1394 spec is most likely to be silent on many mechanical aspects of the connector design. Many vendors make 4 pin and 6 pin connectors, some of which are cheap and flimsy, and others which will withstand a much wider range of stresses. The connector which Sony uses may be one tenth the cost of the seemingly identical 4 pin connector made by Molex, and Sony has made a conscious and deliberate design choice to trade cost versus life expectancy. To the hardware design engineer, such decisions are made on virtually all parts as part of the value engineering process.
My point is that the 1394 spec is not where the fault lies. Mil standard connectors as are used on avionics and other mission-critical systems cost hundreds of dollars apiece in some cases. They withstand repeated vibrations, insertions, misalignments, etc. and keep on working.
Sony could chose to use very high reliability connectors, but costs become prohibitive. Which leaves the hapless consumer with the option to have it repaired at great cost, repair it himself as you did, use a crippled camcorder, or retire the camcorder entirely. Not unlike any appliance, automobile, or other product we own.
This is the specific mil standard spec (MIL-STD-1344) which my prior reply made reference to. You will see that it defines connector characteristics specific to mechanical performance and reliability. The electronics industry has its' own version, EIA-364, as does NASA and others.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.